San Marcos free press. [volume] (San Marcos, Tex.) 1877-1892, 1887-06-02
Reply Of Gen. Maxey to Hon. Barney
Gibbs.
PARIS, Tex, April 8, 1887.

GiDDS.
PARIS, Tex, April 8, 1887.
Hon. d. Gibbs, Dallas, Tex.
Sir: have the honor to acknowl
edge receipt Of communication, nm
der date Austin, 4th inst, signed by
u committee, advising me that q
meeting was held in Austin, 30th ult.,
the object of which was to call q con-
vention to meet in Dallas in May,
prox., to set forth clearly and un-
equivocally:
1. The time.honored and cardinal
principles of the Democratic party
from jefferson down to the present
time, viz: opposition to all forms Of
sumptuary legislation.
2. A vigorous and we'll organized
campaign against the proposed pro-
hibition amendment to the constitu-
ton.
am invited to be present and to
address the convention. The first
proposition in the communication
couples with the second and assumes.
l. That the prohibition amend
ment to the constitution to be sub
mitted to vote of the people is q
form of "sumptuary legislation
2. That the believers in the Demo
cratic principles taught by Thomas
Jefferson should therefore opposethe
amendment, and as logical conclu-
sion that the Democratic party should
oppose it, for that party, and that on
| ly as u political party, adheres to
Jeftersonian Democracy.
The two resolutions are based on
the assumption contained in the first,
that the proposed amendment is in
the nature of snmptuary legislation.
I do not so regard it. The State OF
Texas has complete power over the
whole question as an integral part OF
the great police powers never granted
to the general government. The po-
lice powers of the State are wholly
distinct and apart from sumptuary
Legislation.
As the people of Texas have the
lawful power, in the mode and man
ner prescribed by the constitution, to
adopt or reject the proposed amend
ment, I propose, as a Jeffersonian
Democrat, to abide by what Mr.. JET
ferson laid down as cardinal princi-
pie of Democracy, to- wit: absolute
acquiescence in the decisions of the
majority, the vital principle Of repub.
lies, from which there is no appeal
but to force, the vital principle and
immediate parent of despotism.'
Second-Manifestly the PROPOSE
tions assume that the Democratic
party, as such, should oppose this
amendment.
The phraseology leaves no doubt
on, this point. As Democrat l
would regard the expression at Dal-
las precisely as Iregard that at Waco,
as in no wise authoritative or binding
on the Democratic party.
That party should not suffer itself
to be dragged into this controversy.
The only real question involved in
the proposed amendment is: Is its
adoption expedieot?
On this the wisest and purest men
in the State differ. Democrats OF
ability, intelligence and integrity dif-
fer.
The Democratic party, as such, has
nothing, and ought to have nothing
to do with the question. AS citizens,
let every man exercise his best judg-
ment and vote accordingly.
1 propose to exercise my right as q
citizen, and whilst 1 do not have the
confidence which some have in the
efficacy of the measure, to the full ex-
tent claimed for 1t, will, in the in
terest of good morals, peace and
prosperity, resolve the doubt in favor
of that side which seeks the greatest
good to the greatest number, and
vote for the amendment. Very re
spectfully,
TSipned1 S. B. MAxEY.